User talk:SCΛRECROW/Archive1

Some advice
Hi there. I noticed this edit and undid it. You seem new to Wikipedia, And I'd be happy to showyou the ropes, if you wanted. Let me know what you think (btw all my contributions are at User:Steve Crossin, my account was recently renamed). Steven Zhang The clock is ticking....  06:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC) At a second glance, you've been here since January. Couldn't tell by your talk page. Could you please explain your reasons for the above edit? Thanks. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking....  06:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Please update your status with WP:VG
Dear WikiProject Video games member,

You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games members or User WPVG somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in the recent months.

The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.

All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:
 * Editing video game-related pages in the Article namespace
 * Participating in video game-related discussions in the Project namespace (WT:VG, WP:AfD, WP:GAN, etc.)

Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.
 * —WikiProject Video games (delivery by xenobot  03:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Jedi
Apologies - I reverted back to an unclean page.. I'd been following a vandal cleaning up after them and somehow it slipped through Clovis Sangrail (talk) 11:30, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Stargate: Continuum
Thanks for completing the work on this GA. :D --TIAYN (talk) 23:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Number of gates
Too complicated? Why? Simple mathematics. Then the “1,987,690,320” not valid,→ unnecessary? Stewe007 (talk) 05:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Fine, you can make a proper edit then.  [SCΛRECROW] CrossCom 2.0 05:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Rollback
Hi.

You do a lot of anti-vandalism work. I think you ask to get rollback. Rollback is a lot faster, and it carries no obligation. I think you should get it. Please consider. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. :) But from looking at some requests for rollback permissions, I think that I'll have to start to issue warning notices to vandals for a while before I make a request.  [SCΛRECROW] CrossCom 2.0 10:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, you are warning people now. Do you want me to add a request? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. Thanks for that.  [SCΛRECROW] CrossCom 2.0 02:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

R6: Vegas 2
Hey, you beat me to it on the links section, haha. I was just submitting it when it showed a conflict.

You don't think that "boss battle" factoid should be in a trivia section? It seems kind of orphaned if you put it anywhere else, although single player section is most relevant other place to put it.

Also, I think you could space it down a line, but your call. It seems like a random thought at the end of that paragraph, haha.

Anyhow, good work.--Isfppoet (talk) 13:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Well, having a section with a single line of trivia doesn't seem worthwhile. Might as well add it as a separate line. Do you think the plot section needs a trim? [SCΛRECROW] CrossCom 2.0 13:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree on the trivia thing, just thought it would allow for future trivia, but for now that looks okay actually. And yes I was just thinking that about the plot.  Or if you can put one of those "collapsible" frames to contain it where you can hide/show the plot, that would be good too. But really it's just too darn long TBH. --Isfppoet (talk) 13:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think a collapsible frame would be a good solution. I'll tag it with a plot notice for now. I'll see if I can work on trimming it later. Or you can make some edits.  [SCΛRECROW] CrossCom 2.0 13:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Mmkay, I'll play with trimming it and see what I can do. I'm still learning the conventions and techniques around here, I only just started playing with it again for the first time in almost 2 years, haha.  But yeah, it looks like the show/hide functions would mess it up or else just make it look inconsistent.  I'll save the experimentation for the sandbox and just try to trim this monster down, haha. --Isfppoet (talk) 13:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm done with the plot summary I think. I'm tired of messing with it. ^_^ I think it's alright. I'll look it over a second time for errors and such later, but I went ahead and revised the article. Nice working with ya. ^_^ It's fun doing my little part in managing this massive collection of (mis?)information!--Isfppoet (talk) 15:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha. Thanks for that. Nice working with you too.  [SCΛRECROW] CrossCom 2.0 01:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:PERM/R
Hi SCΛRECROW. The High Fin Sperm Whale has put in a request for rollback permissions for you at Requests for permissions/Rollback. When you have time, could you please indicate on that page whether you would like rollback tool or not? Thanks,  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 10:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
Hi. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing!  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 10:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.
 * Thanks.  [SCΛRECROW] CrossCom 2.0 10:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Page deletion
Hi SCΛRECROW!

I have closed the AfD you created at Articles for deletion/Were is copper found. When you encounter pages that are blatantly inappropriate, it is highly likely that they are eligible for speedy deletion. If you look at the policy, you will find several tags you can use to mark such pages, such as db-a7 (more specifically db-person, db-band, db-corp etc.), db-vandalism and db-spam. If there is no CSD criterion that fits, there is also the proposed deletion process. For pages that have no chance of surviving AfD, one of those should normally be used instead. Regards,  (talk) 08:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that info. I'll keep that in mind next time.  SCΛRECROW CrossCom 08:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Universities COTM
Hi SCΛRECROW. Thanks for all your improvements to the Monash University page. You might be interested to know that this page has been nominated for the WikiProject Universities Collaboration of the Month, and can be voted for at WikiProject Universities/COTM. Thanks again for all your work. Profb21 (talk) 15:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries.  SCΛRECROW CrossCom 22:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Melbourne, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 03:46, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry? What was wrong with that edit?  SCΛRECROW CrossCom 03:48, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It was an error. Sorry about that. ~ Nerdy Science Dude  (✉ • ✐) 03:50, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. :)  SCΛRECROW CrossCom 03:50, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to 24 (season 8), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you.  Mr. R00t    Leave me a Message   04:02, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Uh, another error?  SCΛRE  CROW  04:05, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No not an error. You messed up the table formatting.  Mr. R00t     Leave me a Message   04:11, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I do not believe that to be the case. I reverted this edit . Then you reverted me. Then you reverted yourself to my edit: .  SCΛRE  CROW  04:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Whatever. Revert me than. I don't particularly care. Just make sure you have a good explanation.  Mr. R00t     Leave me a Message   04:16, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright. Checked. You were right about that. Thought you might wanna know that using Igloo any edit you have ever made shows up as blatant vandalism.  Mr. R00t     Leave me a Message   04:17, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Not a problem. I'll see you around. :)  SCΛRE  CROW  04:18, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: List of changes in Star Wars re-releases
If my personal point of view is not welcome on the Star Wars changes page, then remove the comment about "Yub Nub" too. Who says it's called that? It's opinion only - if my (accurate - prove me wrong) comment is to be removed then get rid of the other one too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.89.115 (talk) 06:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough then.  SCΛRE  CROW  06:41, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Rats - I must confess, I was looking forward to an arguement. I'm not a troll of any kind, I just *REALLY* hate that stupid "Yubyub" song. Forgive my not following correct 'talk page protocol' but I don't know it yet... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.89.115 (talk) 07:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha, I see. Well, you had good a reason to remove the "yubyub" part. Just a couple of tips about leaving comments, you can indent comments with colons and you should sign your messages with four tildes i.e. ~ .  SCΛRE  CROW  07:51, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks!  SCΛRE  CROW  04:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Houston, we have a problem ...
The problem with your changes to Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Armies/OF/Canada‎ and Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Armies/OF/Belgium‎ is that the images are NOT free use, hence by adding them to the template, the template is no longer free use. I suggest you revert your edits. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 03:16, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ditto Template:Ranks and Insignia of NATO Armies/OF/United Kingdom. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 03:21, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

My apologies, I didn't realise that the images were not free use. Thanks for pointing that out.  SCΛRE  CROW  10:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No big deal. But it's a pain, isn't it ... Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:11, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Great, precise Work
Just want to recognize your work on Wiki. For example latest edits Nikon related: D3100 and lenses added quickly and precisely, and not forgotten details like D3100. Excellent! Wispanow (talk) 09:44, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much!  SCΛRE  CROW  09:46, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. You are collecting userboxes, do you like barnstars? Wispanow (talk) 10:36, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha. I wouldn't mind a small collection of barnstars. :P  SCΛRE  CROW  10:46, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * OK. But takes time, probably tomorrow or monday. A full width one or a smaller width to place for example at the right? Should i add it directly or give you a copy at your talk page? Wispanow (talk) 11:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't really mind which size. You can add it yourself if you want.  SCΛRE  CROW  11:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
I was just watching (have to refresh a lot) the recent changes. Good god there's a lot of vandals! Not worth asking "why they bother?" but, I assume the idea of disallowing IP editors has been discussed. The sheer number of edits is...I'm really amazed how clean this place is considering how many idiots there seem to be. Anyway, thanks for explaining how to tidy up better. I'll take some time to watch and learn before Java tooling my way into the flow though. Nice to meet you. TY -- Fred Gandt (talk&#124;contribs) 13:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Glad I could help. See you around!  SCΛRE  CROW  13:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Preferred and/or Recognized editing terms
Hi again. I'm wondering if for the sake of continuity and clarity there is a glossary of preferred terms editors should use to explain their actions? For example: If one was to internally link a word/term by encapsulating with & , would we call that word/term "Wikilinked" or something similar? Is there any written or hitherto unwritten guidelines regarding how we refer to our editing? Or should we just do our best and hope for the same? Any help would be appreciated. I would prefer (if possible) to fit in rather than stick out ;) -- Fred Gandt (talk&#124;contribs) 16:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I can point you towards these guidelines and this glossary (shorter glossary). There really aren't any rules or edit summary syntax that are "set in stone" so to speak, just general consensus. However, it is always best if you do leave an edit summary, I think any edit summary that is concise and accurately describes the edit is sufficient.  SCΛRE  CROW  23:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Perfect! Thank you very much. -- Fred Gandt (talk&#124;contribs) 11:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a problem.  SCΛRE  CROW  12:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

RfC firearm external linking
You may be interested in this RfC on firearm articles and external linking since I see you have reverted the user dropping it in articles. ⋙–Berean–Hun</b><b style="color:#00C">ter—►</b> (<b style="color:#00C">(⊕)</b>) 05:40, 23 December 2010 (UTC)